final philosophy essay

.docx

School

Indian River State College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

1020

Subject

Arts Humanities

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by BailiffMoonDove4 on coursehero.com

Anisha 1 Farhana Anisha Professor Joseph Palencik Intro to humanities November 18, 2023 U.S. Military Spending In particular, the MIC's involvement in supplying weapons for conflicts the author believes to be unjust is criticized in the article, which examines the moral consequences of the US military- industrial complex (MIC). The counterargument, in contrast, asserts that the MIC fulfills essential roles in maintaining historical continuity, economic stability, and national security. The MIC's contribution to maintaining national security is one of the main arguments in favor of it. Proponents contend that preserving public safety and thwarting any threats require a strong defense sector. The text recognizes the MIC's social benefits, such as employment and money, but contends that these are insufficient explanations for its morally dubious goal of funding military projects. Nonetheless, they contend that, particularly in an increasingly complicated geopolitical environment, having a strong defense capability is essential to safeguarding individuals and maintaining national sovereignty. The article also discusses about past concerns about the moral ramifications of disproportionate war revenues. The article notes that legislative limitations on certain enterprises are frequently connected to harm to employees, clients, or financial harm. Nevertheless, business ethicists seldom proclaim whole businesses to be immoral. It highlights how the defense business and political agendas are entwined, particularly during and after World War II, when the sector purposefully dispersed military personnel and manufacturing across congressional districts. Turning now to the modern setting, the section talks about how federal defense funding has standardized business-sustaining contracts, making it harder to distinguish between the public

Anisha 2 and private sectors. The assertion made by the author that taking on this duty without holding a public discussion departs from the conventional wisdom that holds that the morality of going to war must be discussed by the general public is contested. The discussion also covers the historical opposition to excessive war profits, with certain politicians enacting legislation to restrict earnings from the sale of items used in warfare. The section highlights the politically wrong nature of the subject by asking whether other justifications are sufficient to preserve ethics for the military-industrial complex. The author makes the case in later parts that the U.S. Military-Industrial Complex is immoral in its current objectives and actions and that it seeks imperial hegemony in the benefit of businesses. Although the counterargument acknowledges that U.S. public opinion rejects such profits, it highlights how military industry policies have evolved to overcome ethical issues. The implementation of defense procurement codes of ethics is emphasized as proof of the industry's dedication to moral behavior, implying that historical lessons have shaped the ethical framework that currently governs the MIC. Moreover, the economic impact of the defense sector is emphasized as a key defense for its continued existence. The sector boosts technological innovation and creates jobs. It discusses how business-sustaining contracts are becoming common in federal defense budgeting, causing boundaries between the public and private sectors to become more hazy. The economic benefits of the defense industry are portrayed as vital for the stability and expansion of the national economy, notwithstanding worries about corporate exploitation. To sum up, the counterargument casts doubt on the critical viewpoint regarding the morality of the U.S. Military-Industrial Complex by emphasizing the complex's benefits to national security, the advancement of moral behavior, and the economy. This nuanced viewpoint

Anisha 3 attempts to give a more impartial assessment of the MIC, taking into account both its alleged benefits and its down sides. The article also explores the idea of imperialist amorality and traces its origins back to the early 1900s Open Door policy. According to the author, the traditional ethical presumption that legitimate wars are exclusively for national defense has begun to erode as a result of this policy, which aims to increase the global market access available to American firms. Supporters of this viewpoint, however, would counter that the United States needs to be present around the world in order to play the role of a superpower and preserve stability in international affairs, implying that there are a variety of reasons for such policies. The conversation then turns to a pivotal historical moment that occurred in the middle of the 1980s: the institutionalization of overpricing by the Military-Industrial Complex (MIC), which led to penalties and recoveries. They emphasizes the industry's dedication to resolving ethical issues, even if it acknowledges war profiteering as a minor concern. The development of codes of ethics for defense procurement is cited as proof that the defense sector is subject to ethical scrutiny and is flexible enough to adjust to changing conditions. This demonstrates how the sector recognizes the value of moral principles even when pursuing global influence and national security. The section also looks at those joining the American military in spite of their age's seeming imperial amorality. It highlights a discrepancy between the goals of those directing war activities and enlistees. The article argues, however, that people's voluntary recruitment indicates a variety of causes, such as a need for discipline, financial considerations, and patriotism. This calls into question the idea that recruits are unintentionally advancing immoral goals as their individual goals might not align with the more general geopolitical goals of imperialist practices. Essentially, the elaboration offers a comprehensive understanding of imperialist amorality,

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help